Personal Injury Attorney New York City Felony Assault Case

The client was a man in his seventies with no prior criminal history, who had divorced his former spouse several years earlier following marital infidelity, yet maintained intermittent contact due to lingering emotional attachment and concern for her well being.

When he learned that his former spouse had been hospitalized for a serious leg injury requiring surgery, he voluntarily assumed the role of caregiver, providing daily assistance, managing hospital logistics, and advancing funds for medical expenses despite his own limited financial means.

This extended caregiving period formed the contextual background later presented by the personal injury attorney New York City defense team as evidence of the client’s character, motivations, and lack of malicious intent.

During the hospitalization, the client overheard a phone conversation between his former spouse and the individual with whom she had previously had an affair, which triggered an intense emotional response.

After briefly leaving the hospital to regain composure, he returned and confronted her, and during the ensuing argument he impulsively struck her with a cosmetic container that had been placed nearby, causing a head injury that required immediate medical attention.

Hospital staff alerted law enforcement, and the client was arrested and investigated for felony assault involving a dangerous instrument under New York law, an offense that carries substantial custodial risk regardless of the parties’ prior relationship.

Under New York practice, an object not inherently designed as a weapon may nevertheless qualify as a dangerous instrument if used in a manner capable of causing serious physical injury, which placed the client at risk of felony prosecution despite the absence of premeditation.

The personal injury attorney New York City defense team identified that while the injury was real, it was not life threatening, and the incident occurred in a highly charged emotional context without any prior pattern of violence.

This assessment shaped the strategy toward preventing indictment rather than pursuing an unrealistic claim of factual innocence.

Rather than contesting the occurrence itself, counsel emphasized immediate acceptance of responsibility, genuine remorse, and the client’s advanced age, clean record, and caregiving conduct prior to the incident.

Detailed submissions were prepared to demonstrate that the conduct was impulsive, situational, and unlikely to recur, which is a critical consideration for prosecutors evaluating whether the interests of justice require formal prosecution or may be served through discretionary relief.

With appropriate safeguards and without exerting pressure, counsel facilitated communication that allowed the former spouse to acknowledge the client’s extensive caregiving efforts and to accept his sincere apology.

As a result, she expressed a clear and voluntary wish not to pursue criminal punishment, memorialized through written statements that were carefully prepared to meet prosecutorial review standards.

In New York practice, while victim consent is not determinative, such a position carries substantial weight when coupled with credible mitigation.

The personal injury attorney New York City team submitted a comprehensive mitigation package highlighting the client’s remorse, age related vulnerability to incarceration, lack of prior violence, and the isolated nature of the incident.

Supporting materials emphasized that continued prosecution would not advance public safety and that the client had already experienced profound personal and legal consequences as a result of the arrest and investigation.

This approach was consistent with New York’s discretionary framework for resolving low recidivism cases involving first time elderly defendants.

After reviewing the mitigation materials and the victim’s stated position, the prosecutor exercised discretion to resolve the matter through a declination of prosecution without filing formal charges, allowing the matter to conclude without indictment, trial, or conviction.

This outcome spared the client from incarceration, permanent criminal records, and the cascading collateral consequences that accompany felony assault convictions in New York.

This case illustrates how a personal injury attorney New York City defendants rely upon can play a decisive role in criminal matters involving bodily injury, particularly where emotional context, family dynamics, and proportionality are central to the analysis.

Early intervention, honest accountability, and strategic mitigation can redirect even serious allegations toward humane and legally sound resolutions when handled with precision and credibility.